<quoted text>Well, you spoke for me when you claimed "everyone" is scorning a certain poster. I wasn't scorning him, and two other posters said they weren't scorning him. Why did you lie? No one was scorning him except you fruitcake.

<quoted text>--Just tired of seeing you and others using children in order to promote anti-homosexual sentiment.--If you cared about children at all, you'd be thrilled that there are tens of thousands of gay and lesbians willing to take them into their home and provide them with the love and support that they need so that they can grow up to be adults.But you're not. You're an ignorant jerk who believes that gays are disordered and incapable of such things.If we're disordered, maybe we should all file for Social Security Disability benefits and live on the dole.--Yes, you do throw them under the bus. You use them to try to block same-sex marriage. Kids have nothing to do with marriage. You won't find children listed on a marriage certificate application or license. You don't hear them being mentioned at wedding ceremonies.You use them to advance a hateful, fear-based agenda that has no basis in science.--Maybe you should direct your "gods" question to Kimare, who constantly zeros in on children and the "remarkable" (sarcasm) belief that only heterosexual couples procreate.--I guarantee that I know gay men who are better fathers to their biological or adopted children than most straight men. The statistic that I read indicates that there are some 20,000,000 kids in the US who do not have a father present in the home.You guys are such good role models.--Are you so "gay paranoid" that you see gay undertones into anything a gay man says to you? Or maybe you're one of those guys who thinks that every gay man wants to take you to bed.It's been my experience that straight guys who believe such horseshit are usually uglier than a mud fence--nobody would have anything to do with them.Your personality alone makes you so hideous that no gay man (or probably straight woman) would give you the time of day.--Such bluster from a mental midget... As they say down here, "Anytime you feel froggy; jump on down to Knoxville."

1. The Queen of denial once again claiming any point they have no logical response to is 'hate'. You have made it clear, time and time again, the reason, the law, children, history, science, culture and religion, NOTHING will stand against your denial of distinctions

2. Equating a mother and father with any other default situation is like equating sugar and arsenic. Your picture denies the facts: A child outside the natural family is IMMEDIATELY put at a serious disadvantage.

3. Children being protected from a fake marriage is throwing THEM under the bus and denying science??? One of the most idiotic assertions you've made.

Moreover, I have often heard reference to the children to come in wedding ceremonies and blessings. That will never happen to a ss couple, will it.

4. Last time I checked, it takes a hetero sexual couple to make a child. I take back my statement in point three. THIS is the most idiotic assertion you've made!

5. Your knowledge of gay parenting is more accurate than all the studies? Guaranteed??? Damn, it's hard to rate idiotic statements flowing from you at this rate...

In the latest, largest, most scientific study to date, lesbian couples rated LAST out of seven family types, AFTER single parents. GAY COUPLES DIDN'T EVEN REGISTER!!!

6. Closed with an ad homoan attack...

All this BS from the idiot who cursed children...

Needless to say, all this only exposes the evil offense homosexuals are perpetrating on marriage, family and children.

<quoted text>1. The Queen of denial once again claiming any point they have no logical response to is 'hate'. You have made it clear, time and time again, the reason, the law, children, history, science, culture and religion, NOTHING will stand against your denial of distinctions2. Equating a mother and father with any other default situation is like equating sugar and arsenic. Your picture denies the facts: A child outside the natural family is IMMEDIATELY put at a serious disadvantage.3. Children being protected from a fake marriage is throwing THEM under the bus and denying science??? One of the most idiotic assertions you've made.Moreover, I have often heard reference to the children to come in wedding ceremonies and blessings. That will never happen to a ss couple, will it.4. Last time I checked, it takes a hetero sexual couple to make a child. I take back my statement in point three. THIS is the most idiotic assertion you've made!5. Your knowledge of gay parenting is more accurate than all the studies? Guaranteed??? Damn, it's hard to rate idiotic statements flowing from you at this rate...In the latest, largest, most scientific study to date, lesbian couples rated LAST out of seven family types, AFTER single parents. GAY COUPLES DIDN'T EVEN REGISTER!!!6. Closed with an ad homoan attack...All this BS from the idiot who cursed children...Needless to say, all this only exposes the evil offense homosexuals are perpetrating on marriage, family and children.

Regarding your comments, 1-7; you're wrong.

Gay parents provide excellent care to children. If they did not, then the courts and laws of this country would IMMEDIATELY REQUIRE that children in families headed by same-sex couples be removed and placed in foster care.

There are enough anti-LGBT organizations out there who would take gay adoptions to various courts and PROVE, using your "studies", that LGBT individuals are not fit to raise children.

And if the courts and lawmakers agreed with organizations, Departments of Human Services and private adoption agencies would not be allowed to place children in the homes of gays and lesbians.

That has yet to happen. Why do you think that is?

Do you think it's because our meager numbers of LGBT citizens in this country hold such massive political power that we're able to force the continuation of gay adoptions?

I'll tell you why it hasn't happened. Your "studies" are so flawed that no court system or legislative proposal would stand a chance in hell of being made law.

Unlike you, I base my comments on REAL WORLD observation and not on one or two studies that can easily be ripped to shreds by a first-year student of psychology, sociology, or research scientist.

<quoted text>"He'll not 'toe tappin' with you." doesn't really work, does it? And, if I was closeted, would that make you happy? To call me "g4y"? Implication being that misery loves company?

Actually it does, whether you alter and take my post out of context or not..No, I really hope you're not gay. I wouldn't wish an arrogant piece of sh*t like you on any one, well maybe that asstroll Frankie. BTW no implication of anything, but go ahead be miserable.

<quoted text>Right there is an excellent example of the incredible childish stupidity of the Stains.There's no way I can possibly know the population of a planet. But when they walk by me on the street or appear on TV, I can see them.

LOL Paranoid rantings of a bigot! Actually Pappy, it's YOU who looks dumber than sh*t...told you, you should read.

<quoted text>Regarding your comments, 1-7; you're wrong.Gay parents provide excellent care to children. If they did not, then the courts and laws of this country would IMMEDIATELY REQUIRE that children in families headed by same-sex couples be removed and placed in foster care.There are enough anti-LGBT organizations out there who would take gay adoptions to various courts and PROVE, using your "studies", that LGBT individuals are not fit to raise children.And if the courts and lawmakers agreed with organizations, Departments of Human Services and private adoption agencies would not be allowed to place children in the homes of gays and lesbians.That has yet to happen. Why do you think that is?Do you think it's because our meager numbers of LGBT citizens in this country hold such massive political power that we're able to force the continuation of gay adoptions?I'll tell you why it hasn't happened. Your "studies" are so flawed that no court system or legislative proposal would stand a chance in hell of being made law.Unlike you, I base my comments on REAL WORLD observation and not on one or two studies that can easily be ripped to shreds by a first-year student of psychology, sociology, or research scientist.

Wow! An arbitrary judgement of 'wrong'. That the defense of a mature person...

Sorry queen, at this point, my points stand.

Based on your reasoning, the government has removed children in all homes they are at risk in. Really

As to the studies used to excuse depriving a child of one parent gender and placing them in the riskiest default setting, they are the ones debunked as deceptive and unscientific. The one gays slander has been vindicated. Moreover, it simply validates what countless studies have validated for default families.

Example: Children in a home absent a father are FIVE times more likely to get in trouble with the law. You suggest being a lesbian eradicates that danger. The claim would be hilariously stupid if the victim wasn't a child.

When you present something worth understanding, I'll extend my interest. But I certainly have no interest in your fundie-twirling bumper sticker talking point nonsense that is all completely irrelevant. You know, like your fascination with sterility and anal sex.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.